Cited by 336Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchToxin Mechanisms and ImmunotoxinsRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 105 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 83 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Bispecific antibodies for cancer therapy: The light at the end of the tunnel?

Open access

Abstract

With 23 approvals in the US and other countries and four approvals outside US, antibodies are now widely recognized as therapeutic molecules. The therapeutic and commercial successes met by rituximab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and other mAbs have inspired antibody engineers to improve the efficacy of these molecules. Consequently, a new wave of antibodies with engineered Fc leading to much higher effector functions such as antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity or complement-dependent cytotoxicity is being evaluated in the clinic, and several approvals are expected soon. In addition, research on a different class of antibody therapeutics, bispecific antibodies, has recently led to outstanding clinical results, and the first approval of the bispecific antibody catumaxomab, a T cell retargeting agent that was approved in the European Union in April 2009. This review describes the most recent advances and clinical study results in the field of bispecific antibodies, a new class of molecules that might outshine conventional mAbs as cancer immunotherapeutics in a near future.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review argues that after years of disappointing first-generation bispecific antibodies, engineered formats—especially triomabs and BiTEs—finally produced encouraging clinical results in cancer therapy. It highlights catumaxomab’s 2009 European approval for malignant ascites and blinatumomab’s potent T-cell–redirected activity in lymphoma and B-ALL.

Key findings

  • First-generation bispecific antibodies (chemical cross-linking or quadromas) showed biological effects but no consistent antitumor activity; HAMA responses limited repeated dosing. HRS-3/A9 produced 1 complete remission and 1 partial remission in 15 patients in one Phase 1 study, then 1 CR and 3 PR in a second trial, but low yield (2.8 g bsAb from 44 g IgG) and high immunogenicity precluded further studies.
  • Catumaxomab, an EpCAM x CD3 triomab, was approved by the European Commission in April 2009 for malignant ascites in EpCAM-positive carcinomas. In a Phase 2/3 pivotal study of 258 patients, catumaxomab gave a four-fold increase in puncture-free survival versus paracentesis alone; in a Phase 1/2 study, 22/23 patients did not require paracentesis between the last infusion and day 37, with up to 5-log reduction of EpCAM-positive malignant cells in ascites.
  • Blinatumomab, a CD19 x CD3 BiTE, led to elimination of target cells in blood at doses as low as 5 μg/m²/day in relapsed NHL; all seven patients treated at 60 μg experienced tumor regression. In a Phase 2 B-ALL trial, 13/16 evaluable patients (81%) became MRD negative, with ongoing responses up to 47 weeks.
  • DNL-based tri-Fabs showed high pretargeting performance: TF2 achieved tumor/blood ratios from 13 at 0.5 h to 395 at 24 h and tumor uptake of 30% ID/g; TF4 improved tumor-to-blood ratio 1,600-fold over a one-step anti-CD20 approach; TF10 gave tumor/blood ratios of 1,000:1 at 3 h versus 5:1 at 24 h for parental anti-MUC-1 IgG.

Methods

  • Narrative review of bispecific antibody formats for cancer therapy, focusing on triomabs and BiTEs, with discussion of first-generation bsAbs, recombinant formats, BiTEs, and DNL antibodies.
  • Synthesizes preclinical studies and clinical trials (Phase 1, 1/2, 2, and 2/3) reported in the literature up to 2009, including a table of recent clinical trials.
  • No systematic search strategy, meta-analysis, or quantitative pooling is described.

Limitations

  • The paper states that future randomized trials are needed to determine whether low amounts of bsAb achieve therapeutic effect; for catumaxomab IV Phase 1, survival analysis was not the primary endpoint.
  • The paper notes that many bsAb trials were early-phase and small, and that some promising molecules had low production yields or high immunogenicity.
  • Evident from the text: this is a narrative review without systematic search or meta-analysis, so format selection and cited evidence may be selective; the 2009 publication date means later clinical developments are not covered.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4161/mabs.1.6.10015

Cites

105 of 105 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 83 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 56 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 50
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 17
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
59 of 59
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Cytotoxic T cells are the most potent killer cells of the immune system.

    “Cytotoxic T cells are considered the most potent killer cells of the immune system.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    EpCAM is sequestered on epithelia and thus much less accessible to antibodies compared to EpCAM in cancer tissue, where it is homogeneously distributed on the cancer cell surface.

    “It is thought that EpCAM is sequestered on epithelia, and thus much less accessible to antibodies compared to EpCAM in cancer tissue, where it is homogeneously distributed on the cancer cell surface.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Memory T cells do not require CD28 costimulation for expansion during secondary responses.

    “It is believed that memory T cells do not require CD28 costimulation for expansion during secondary responses, which could explain the efficiency of BiTEs.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    None of the approved monoclonal antibodies are able to cure cancer as single agents.

    “Unfortunately, none of them are able to cure cancer as single agents.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    BiTE molecules targeting EpCAM expressed on solid tumors of epithelial origin that do not express B7 show similar efficacy.

    “However, BiTE molecules targeting EpCAM expressed on a variety of solid tumor of epithelial origin that do not express B7 show similar efficacy.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    CEA can be shed by phospholipases from the cell surface through cleavage of its glycosylphosphatidylinositol-linkage, causing release into the circulation.

    “However, CEA can be shed by phospholipases from the cell surface through cleavage of its glycosylphosphatidylinositol-linkage, which causes the protein to be released in the circulation.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The emitted beta radiation of 177Lu with a maximum energy of 498 keV is effective in destroying small tumors and metastasis while sparing normal tissue.

    “Furthermore, the emitted β radiation with a maximum energy of 498 keV is effective in destroying small tumors and metastasis while sparing normal tissue”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    177Lu gamma rays are of low energy (113 and 208 keV) and abundance (7 and 11%), which simplifies radiation protection and patient-handling issues.

    “and its γ-rays are of low energy (113 and 208 keV) and abundance (7 and 11%), which simplifies radiation protection and patient-handling issues.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    MT110 does not activate murine T cells.

    “Since MT110 does not activate murine T cells”
9 of 9

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Kufer's 1995 study is cited as a 2008 clinical trial

    Minor

    The cited reference 44 is a 2008 paper by Fury and colleagues, not the 1995 Kufer study described in the text.

  • A 2008 blinatumomab result is cited to a 2000 paper

    Minor

    The text attributes the first result of a 2008 blinatumomab clinical study to reference 54, which lists a 2000 paper on a different class of bispecific antibody.

  • Lindhofer's 1995 paper is cited as a 2006 paper

    Minor

    The text cites reference 21 for a paper that Lindhofer and collaborators published in 1995, but reference 21 lists a 2006 paper by Schlereth and colleagues.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 105 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Chames P, 2009, Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel, 12, 276
  2. Hartmann F, 2001, Clin Cancer Res, 7, 1873
  3. Parsons S, 2009, J Clin Oncol, 27
  4. Muller D, 2007, Curr Opin Mol Ther, 9, 319
  5. Kischel R, 2008, Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res, 99, 2404
  6. McBride WJ, 2006, J Nucl Med, 47, 1678

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–336 of 336

Metadata

Authors
Chames, P., & Baty, D.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Venue
mAbs
Published
2009-11
Volume
1
Issue
6
Pages
539-547
ISSN
  • 1942-0862 (ISSN-L)
  • 1942-0870
OpenAlex
W1848910860
Cited by
336
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 24
FWCI
3.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • mAbs (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Toxin Mechanisms and Immunotoxins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
Keywords
bispecific antibodies, cancer immunotherapy, antibody engineering, catumaxomab, T cell redirection, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, complement-dependent cytotoxicity, monoclonal antibodies, clinical trials
MeSH terms
Animals, Antibody Specificity, Antineoplastic Agents, Humans, Immunotherapy, Neoplasms, Recombinant Proteins, Protein Engineering, Treatment Outcome, Antibodies, Bispecific

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review